Job evaluation involves determining the value of different jobs within an organization through comparison analysis. Human resource management, often in conjunction with workers’ unions, is responsible for developing the appropriate job evaluation tools for the organization (Dessler, 2017). The systematic process incorporates both internal and external assessments. Regular job evaluations increase employee morale since they feel appreciated and part of the company.
The primary purpose of job evaluation is to develop a fair and equitable pay structure for all organizational jobs. It strives to eliminate internal and external inconsistencies associated with the wage structure by creating minimum and maximum wages (Dessler, 2017). For instance, it ensures all qualified workers doing similar tasks receive similar wages. Secondly, job evaluation enhances employee retention. It allows an increase in employee responsibility and more internal promotions since the last job evaluation. Employee retention helps organizations minimize replacement costs.
In addition, job evaluation ensures an organization has the right people to attain future goals. Forecasting is a common phenomenon in business as it gives insight into future changes in the business. Job evaluations ensure proper strategies are implemented to support the organizational goals (Schemmer et al., 2022). Lastly, regular job evaluation help eliminate discrepancies in the gender pay gap. In most companies, gender is a basis of wage determination where male employees receive higher pay than female employees despite being equally qualified and doing the same roles. Job evaluations detect gender pay inequalities and resolve the issues.
There are several methods used in job evaluation processes. Ranking methods grade jobs in the hierarchy from the highest to the lowest and outline the pay scale in each category. It is simple to use and is more common in small organizations (Dessler, 2017). The pay scale depends entirely on the organization. The grading method classifies jobs depending on grades. The grading method’s wage structure depends on the class and other general specifications, such as work responsibilities. Each job undergoes review to ensure appropriate grading. It is simple to use in smaller units; however, where the job specifications are comprehensive, the method can be complicated to use.
The point-rating method groups jobs into various characteristics and then allocates pointy to each characteristic. The characteristics used may include education, experience, responsibility, and the nature of the job, among others. Pay scales are fixed according to the number of points. Hence, having different wage scales within the same job is common depending on grading characteristics (Dessler, 2017). Lastly, factor comparison involves the selection of critical jobs and further analyzing them into different factors. The values of each factor are compared to determine the worth of each job.
The ranking method is the most common job evaluation method involving five steps. Obtaining job information is the first step of job evaluation. It involves gathering adequate data about each job that form the basis of ranking (Schemmer et al., 2022). After gathering the required information, the next step is selecting and grouping jobs. It involves ranking different jobs depending on departments or clusters. Selection and grouping of jobs eliminates the need for comparisons between jobs.
In addition, selecting compensable factors is the third step. These factors help rank and evaluate jobs. However, the ranking method mainly uses only one factor to rank the jobs (Dessler, 2017). Regardless, selecting several factors and choosing the most relevant ones is advisable to evaluate the jobs effectively. The fourth step entails ranking jobs. It involves ranking jobs from the lowest to the highest depending on the job description (Schemmer et al., 2022). Besides, this helps assign appropriate pay scales for additional jobs between the already ranked. Lastly, combining ratings is usually the last step. It is because some jobs are ranked independently, so the average ratings must be determined.
Despite being the most common job evaluation method, the ranking method faces several drawbacks. Ranking creates a culture of competition rather than teamwork. It encourages the use of unethical methods to beat the competition. Employees refrain from sharing ideas and helping colleagues, eventually affecting business operations. Also, employees focus only on the assessment areas (Schemmer et al., 2022). Secondly, the urge to remain competitive results in high-stress levels, thus leading to employee turnover. There is a high level of burnout and absenteeism due to low employee morale. Employees who cannot handle the pressure quit. Witnessing employees miss out on pay rise can be stressful, and employees end up overworking to avoid being on the list.
Additionally, the ranking needs to give room for performance improvements. Ranking from top to bottom means that some employees receive low ranks despite being good at their job. It demoralizes employees and does not give them the urge to perform better. Also, the ranking method limits human development. The method does not aim at unleashing employees’ potential through training and guidance (Schemmer et al., 2022). However, it evaluates employees based on specific criteria at that time, not considering the effects of performance with proper mentorship. It ignores the relevance of transferring skills, hence chasing away helpful talent. Lastly, the ranking method becomes obsolete over time. Ranking as a method of job evaluation is effective as a one-time practice; after that may be bad for a company. The idea of doing away with low performers after every job evaluation leads to understaffing, which is dangerous to the company’s success.
References
Dessler, G. (2017) Human Resource Management. New York: Pearson.
Schemmer, T., Reinhard, J., Brauner, P., & Ziefle, M. (2022). Advantages and challenges of extracting process knowledge through serious games. In Proceedings GamiFIN Conference. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Philipp-Brauner/publication/361053008_Advantages_and_challenges_of_extracting_process_knowledge_through_serious_games/links/6299d18455273755ebcf284f/Advantages-and-challenges-of-extracting-process-knowledge-through-serious-games.pdf
write